It happens to the best of us — we take a shot at some event or function, and the image you have is nothing shy of absolute yuk.
It’s an image that has caught your subject in some bizarre position, or with an expression that makes them look like something right out of a horror movie.
Recently, I, and maybe a lot of you out there, looked at a post on Facebook of Beyonce during a recent performance, where some photographer just happened to snap a pic in such a timely manner. She looked anything but in keeping with her beauty as we know her.
Is this type of shot then not a true reflection of the person? Do we really want to edit out the images we personally don’t find flattering?
When it comes to determining what should and shouldn’t be printed or shown, it really is up to you — after all, its your picture, you took it, and saw fit to print and or display it as such.
I do have a concern, though, as to why one would post some of these pictures. All of us often take pics that don’t exactly come out the way we intended, but these images don’t usually get used for general publication.
Maybe at times, they are used for more comedic and fun situations, such as a roast, to create some humour at an event — maybe, but not always. Discretion, I would think, should be exercised every time.
From a professional stand point, I would never want to print and display these types of images for general use, and most certainly not as a reflection of my skills and abilities.
While I can easily and intentionally take pictures of people looking the worst they possibly can, it serves no purpose other than to make someone look bad.
So I would ask why would you do it?
Bloopers can be, and often are fun. I have intentionally posted some of my very own, of myself no less, but I find no reason or logic to post an image of someone that makes them look bad, simply to mock or humiliate them.
Just think if you or someone you knew had a picture plastered of them that made them look stupid, simply to show them in a humiliating way.
I would even ask if that even reflects well on the photographer. Of course, if this is your style of photography, then go crazy.
I find it hard to imagine that anyone would want to hire these types of skills, though, unless you’re looking to sell those pics to those tabloids that we see in the checkout counters in the local grocery stores. Then go nuts, as they say.
There is an old saying we have often heard told — if you can’t say anything good, don’t say anything at all.
This to me would also apply to pics taken.
Sure, some shots would fit into the genre that maybe display an intense scene of extreme duress, like that of perhaps a war photo journalist, an intense image showing the adverse situation at the time. That would make sense to me, because you're reporting a story.
All of us will have occasion to take some crazy or ugly pics. I’m not sure I would say that you should delete them all, but I would certainly hope one would consider what you would choose to do with any of those images.
If you're sending them to be published, I would certainly question if you really want that particular picture printed as a reflection of your skills. If you’re planning to get the word out about your skills, then you might want to consider what you're sending and what it says about your style, skills, and type of photography.
So, if your images are a reflection of who you are, your skills, and you care about the images you have displayed, give some thought as to what you post and or print.
Remember, a picture is worth a thousand words. How many of those words are going to be about the type of pictures you took?
Chuck Swinden is a professional photographer and photography instructor at Rodenas Photography. For more information, visit www.rodenasphotography.com.
